PDA

View Full Version : How do you play characters smarter than yourself?



Mnemnosyne
2010-08-13, 03:53 PM
I'm sure DM's especially face this problem a great deal, but even players of intelligent characters will have this problem. The average real-life human D&D player would probably be considered INT 10-14, with particularly intelligent people possibly approaching 16, but I doubt there are many players who could claim an 18 intelligence, since that's meant to be the pinnacle of natural human ability. We're talking Einsteins and Stephen Hawkings here, which puts most of us far below that level. One might argue that they were high enough level to get a few int bonuses from leveling, but even so that puts them at 23 maximum, while D&D characters with stat-boosting magical items can commonly exceed these numbers by a considerable amount.

So I am curious as to how others handle the issue of playing NPC's and characters that are vastly more intelligent and possibly vastly wiser than they could possibly hope to be.

DM's seem to have an easier time at it, they can construct a plan and then not stick to it if they decide the character would have thought of that before. An idea I have come up with for playing super-intelligent NPC's is to give them a number of plan-adjustments based on their INT or WIS score or both. Design a plan and stronghold or whatever, and when the players come up with something I didn't think of, I might spend one of these adjustments to alter the NPC's defenses to counter that plan. By limiting the number of such adjustments strictly based on the NPC's ability scores, I prevent it from being a free 'he thinks of everything', since there are a limited number of times I can adjust the existing plan like this, but it seems to allow me to play a character much more intelligent than myself by making adjustments after the fact for things that such an individual would have thought of.

As a player, on the other hand, it is much more difficult to accurately portray such a character, it would seem. There's no easy way to go 'well he would have thought of that' even when I didn't. Especially since as a player it would often mean undoing something we've already done.

One of the few ways I can think of - if there's time - is to come to boards like this one for advice on the situation, thus getting the opinions of many in order to make up for the fact that none of us are as smart as the character in question. We can then hopefully pick the best advice. However very often there's no time to do such a thing (such as if the problem comes up mid-session and needs to be solved right then).

How do you handle playing characters smarter than you, as a DM and as a player? Obviously the situations are quite different, so it's really two questions there.

Lord Vampyre
2010-08-13, 04:27 PM
It was true that in 2nd edition that an 18 was considered the pinnacle of human ability, except your Int and Wis went up with age.

Personnally, I've always taken the Int score to be approximately 1/10th of the average person's IQ. Making a character with a 13 or 14 Int, approximates to an IQ of 130 to 140.

Now we also have to remember that our society today is built on the geniuses of yesterday. Meaning that some of the things we take for granted today, like architecture and engineering were developed by people with IQ's approaching or even exceeding the 180 to 200 range. Their work took them years of research. Fortunately for us, they documented all of their material, so we don't have to recreate it from scratch.

It is unreasonable to expect your character to think of something that the average person could do, simply because they don't have the access to the vast amount of knowledge available that we have now. Unfortunately, even a genius is limited to the level of technology he is currently at.

Now, to actually play a character smarter than myself, I generally look at their skills and see what they might come up with based on their background. Generally, if the character is actually smarter than the player, it will come up in play. Simply with insight, knowledge, and other various skills working out better than player could manage in real life. Just my opinion, but hey its worked so far for me.

Lev
2010-08-13, 04:35 PM
Simple, if you are a player don't play anything you can't clearly imagine-- it says it in the book like if you've never been out in the woods simply do not play a ranger over something else.

NPCs, Dragons, Gods, it's pretty easy. Give them a character flaw that impedes how they show it off, make them slow and deliberate to act, and give them DM mulligans when things don't work out exactly.

When it comes down to it, you shouldn't be DMing or playing things you really can't imagine very well. If you think that sucks then it probably does, kinda explains why DnD is played primarily by Nerds and not just Geeks-- Chess players and not just Anime watchers, heh.

Soranar
2010-08-13, 04:45 PM
A character that's smarter than you, can reach the same conclusion as you much faster. He can also draw on more knowledge than you can (normally).

But, you're not restrained by time like he is. And you have the infinite power of Google , Wikipedia and sites like these on your side.

Example

In combat, a round is only 6 seconds of "real time" for your character but you take a lot longer to plan it out. That ability alone makes you smarter than your character (simply having time to check where everyone is, what they're doing, know who will act first and then decide on the proper course of action is a lot)

Einstein often mentioned that he wasn't smarter than everyone else: he just ponders things for a long time. Being smarter, arguably, makes that process shorter so give yourself enough time to figure out which action is the best.

Of course replicating a smart person that gets to think for a long time... that's a problem. As you mentioned, and what you're currently doing, you do have advantage. You can ask for advice from many people (while out of character), read on whatever subject and act as if your character just thought of it (i.e. Trolls are vulnerable to fire: we all know that but not necessarily our characters) or mimic the greats (i.e.: I saw this in a movie once, I read about this smart thing/act/trick somewhere, etc.)

N.B. Just remember that if someone really smart (talented) makes a mistake, it's usually catastrophic compared to an average person. The reason is fairly simple: that person is so used to being right (and not be able to ask anyone else for advice since he/she is the most qualified) that when they do make a mistake it's often impressive (thus you can act ''smar" by doing something stupid, helps if your Wisdom is low)

Mando Knight
2010-08-13, 05:50 PM
The smartest people know how to fake knowledge and derive actual facts from real knowledge. At the same time. Seamlessly.
...I think. I know I do it all the time, and most everyone seems to believe me and ask me questions, so...

Also, if all of your knowledge is magic, then you don't have to be really smart to mimic the high Int. It's magic. If the fourth rune comes from the ancient Hygalian symbol for "destruction" and the circled star represents the eternity of the heavens, and you're the expert on that kind of stuff, who's going to argue with you?

Lev
2010-08-13, 06:13 PM
The smartest people know how to fake knowledge and derive actual facts from real knowledge. At the same time. Seamlessly.
...I think. I know I do it all the time, and most everyone seems to believe me and ask me questions, so...

Also, if all of your knowledge is magic, then you don't have to be really smart to mimic the high Int. It's magic. If the fourth rune comes from the ancient Hygalian symbol for "destruction" and the circled star represents the eternity of the heavens, and you're the expert on that kind of stuff, who's going to argue with you?

http://www.chessboss.com/
He means that a smart character will think of things differently than it's more simple player-- it's about logic pathways in the brain AKA the amount of oxygenated blood being absorbed and efficiently converted in the neocortex and then transferring that energy into efficient logic.

Chess masters commonly burn 4,000-6,000 calories per day due to this energy usage and it's this "12 steps ahead" mentality used in everyday life which actually raises one's int score.

Now, try playing a few rounds on chessboss and you'll see what high int is.

AtlanteanTroll
2010-08-13, 06:14 PM
Im not into smart characters. So I dont run into this problem. If I did, I would simply let the dice speak for themselves, and use my IRL Bluff skill to pass by.

jiriku
2010-08-13, 06:18 PM
1. Take more time than the PC has.

2. Use resources that aren't available to the PC.

3. Get opinions from RL experts on a subject, even if the PC isn't an expert.

Yukitsu
2010-08-13, 06:23 PM
http://www.chessboss.com/
He means that a smart character will think of things differently than it's more simple player-- it's about logic pathways in the brain AKA the amount of oxygenated blood being absorbed and efficiently converted in the neocortex and then transferring that energy into efficient logic.

Chess masters commonly burn 4,000-6,000 calories per day due to this energy usage and it's this "12 steps ahead" mentality used in everyday life which actually raises one's int score.

Now, try playing a few rounds on chessboss and you'll see what high int is.

They found that chess has a limited number of solutions, kind of like tic-tac-toe, so it's not as great an example anymore. Chess can currently be won with wrote memorization rather than intelligence, which is why computers that learn eventually always draw or win. So that place isn't the best example.

As to the OP, just do the best you can. I just remember to take stock of everything the party has, what the limitations of those abilities are, and mix them and the situation to create solutions. Usually I can come up with something that makes combat easier, or bypasses it. Am I int 23 like my character? No, but the other players at the table comment that I have smart ideas that keep us alive.

Orzel
2010-08-13, 06:25 PM
I take my time and metagame hard. Whip out that search engine, bro.

PId6
2010-08-13, 06:33 PM
Divinations, Knowledge everything, and metagame. You really don't have too many more options than that.

graeylin
2010-08-13, 06:43 PM
Die rolls...

Announce to the DM that you are doing a knowledge check, either using a skill (which you have because of your PC's intelligence) or a general check vs your intelligence score, and let the die rule. You should have a higher chance to beat the odds, and then the DM can give your PC a bit of info "you" don't have, making it seem the PC is smarter.

Nobwillick stops at the door, and surveys the room, looking for clues (intelligence check). He knows that every room leaves behind clues about the person who owned it, if one can only decipher them.

DeltaEmil
2010-08-13, 06:44 PM
In D&D 3rd edition, high intelligence score is for me nothing more but a modifier to a few combat stats as well as bonus skill points, and I don't claim to play a smart person.

Mando Knight
2010-08-13, 06:44 PM
They found that chess has a limited number of solutions, kind of like tic-tac-toe, so it's not as great an example anymore. Chess can currently be won with wrote memorization rather than intelligence,

Ah, no. There's a limited number of solutions, but the possible plays are in the millions, so it's still strategy up to the point where you can look it up in an endgame table. Before then, the openings have names (since they're limited), but you've got several thousands of possibilities between where you are and where one will checkmate.

Lord Vampyre
2010-08-13, 07:14 PM
Ah chess!!! As with most things in life, there are a finite number of possibilities. Fortunately, this finite number is far larger than most people can actually fathom. Thus strategy still exists, unless your a computer.

Lev
2010-08-13, 07:18 PM
Ah chess!!! As with most things in life, there are a finite number of possibilities. Fortunately, this finite number is far larger than most people can actually fathom. Thus strategy still exists, unless your a computer.
My fists are also finite, there are 2 of them!
Rawr!

fryplink
2010-08-13, 07:40 PM
Ah chess!!! As with most things in life, there are a finite number of possibilities. Fortunately, this finite number is far larger than most people can actually fathom. Thus strategy still exists, unless your a computer.

Assuming that the game is less then 40 moves, there is a claim that the number of different chess games within those moves is 1043, but that is refutable

After the first four moves 71852, according to Flye st. Marie.

YAY google!

aje8
2010-08-13, 07:45 PM
There are more possible chess positions than atoms in the universe. Our computers are no where near solving chess. It is solved for 6 pieces or less on the board though.

Regardless, intelligence is best done by taking more time and using search engines. Also: making stuff up. Use incredibly advanced vocabulary without actually saying anything and the character sounds smart, without you actually being smart.

fryplink
2010-08-13, 07:57 PM
There are more possible chess positions than atoms in the universe. Our computers are no where near solving chess. It is solved for 6 pieces or less on the board though.

Regardless, intelligence is best done by taking more time and using search engines. Also: making stuff up. Use incredibly advanced vocabulary without actually saying anything and the character sounds smart, without you actually being smart.

This is true, to the point that once a chess player his tournament level, once you get into the endgame, it's considered polite to concede if it is impossible for you to win, and mighty difficult to stalemate (considering that your opponent is a tournament player of similar skill). My "coach" for chess told me to concede whenever I could tell that even a grandmaster couldn't win the game from there

(ex, opponent has both rooks, and I have a knight, literally impossible for me to win, incredibly improbable to stalemate against even new players)

Mando Knight
2010-08-13, 07:58 PM
Fortunately, this finite number is far larger than most people can actually fathom. Thus strategy still exists, unless your a computer.

Even if my estimate of millions were correct, that would mean only a dedicated chess computer would be able to run the game to its solution. The total databank alone would be in the gigabyte range. But it's too conservative: the game-tree complexity is in the googol range, meaning that any method of mapping out the entire game from start to finish is effectively impossible for anything other than a supergalactic computer. At least. It might even need a heaven-piercing computer.

aje8
2010-08-13, 08:43 PM
This is true, to the point that once a chess player his tournament level, once you get into the endgame, it's considered polite to concede if it is impossible for you to win, and mighty difficult to stalemate (considering that your opponent is a tournament player of similar skill). My "coach" for chess told me to concede whenever I could tell that even a grandmaster couldn't win the game from there

(ex, opponent has both rooks, and I have a knight, literally impossible for me to win, incredibly improbable to stalemate against even new players)
Hum.... weird. My chess teacher has taught me never to resign. (If it wasn't clear, I'm also a competitive player) Because if your chances of winning involve them playing terrible and dropping a rook or even two, there's still a small chance of victory and that small chance is greater than the 0% you get from resigning. Espically given that tourament games are played with a clock and thus them running out time or losing as a result of time trouble when you're dead lost is very possible.

Regardless though, my statement was just correcting those with wildly incorrect estimates. It wasn't meant to state that never resigning is correct, even though I believe that.

Nefarion Xid
2010-08-13, 09:17 PM
I wouldn't say IQ is the best correlate of the Intelligence stat in D&D. Int is more related to your education and accumulated knowledge rather than problem solving and pattern recognition. So, Intelligence is more like "how good you are at academic pursuits" rather than simply "how smart you are".

Take any random grad student. Would they have a high Int score? Sure, along with plenty of ranks in an appropriate knowledge skill. Must they necessarily have a high IQ? From observation... eeeeh! People with advanced degrees just have a high academic acumen, they're good at school, but not necessarily smarter than everyone else. Who would you say is more deserving of an Int 16... a teenage dropout with an IQ of 160 or a university professor with a mere 115?

I think it's the case that wizards are smart because they've worked hard to become so rather than only the smartest people become wizards.

Now, as for playing a character that's more intelligent than you are: make liberal use of your knowledge skills. Grab a circumstance modifier on your diplomacy check because you remember the local etiquette. Exploit monster's vulnerabilities, etc etc.

Edit: I wouldn't say Einstein necessarily had a crushing IQ either. He was just a great deal more focused than many of us could ever hope or would want to be. The amount of time spent thinking about physics and the intensity with which he did it just earned him multiple lifetimes worth of work compressed into a single one. I suppose the majority of us have the same ability to a much smaller degree when we find something that absolutely enthralls us.

urbanpirate
2010-08-13, 09:21 PM
playing a character more intelegent than you are iis not as hard as it would seem.
just keep in mind they are doing all the detail work you are pretty much just calling the shots.

brain surgery for example for the player , cut his head open and remove the tumor is about all you need to know

for the actual surgeon it is much harder. but unless your dm is a nit picking toolbag you shouldn't be concerned about the minutia ( like spelling)

Milskidasith
2010-08-13, 09:23 PM
It was true that in 2nd edition that an 18 was considered the pinnacle of human ability, except your Int and Wis went up with age.

Personnally, I've always taken the Int score to be approximately 1/10th of the average person's IQ. Making a character with a 13 or 14 Int, approximates to an IQ of 130 to 140.

Now we also have to remember that our society today is built on the geniuses of yesterday. Meaning that some of the things we take for granted today, like architecture and engineering were developed by people with IQ's approaching or even exceeding the 180 to 200 range. Their work took them years of research. Fortunately for us, they documented all of their material, so we don't have to recreate it from scratch.

It is unreasonable to expect your character to think of something that the average person could do, simply because they don't have the access to the vast amount of knowledge available that we have now. Unfortunately, even a genius is limited to the level of technology he is currently at.

Now, to actually play a character smarter than myself, I generally look at their skills and see what they might come up with based on their background. Generally, if the character is actually smarter than the player, it will come up in play. Simply with insight, knowledge, and other various skills working out better than player could manage in real life. Just my opinion, but hey its worked so far for me.

I don't think IQ works the way you think it does. Most real life geniuses who did great things would stretch to be 180. 200 is so rare I don't think anybody has actually achieved such an IQ; I think the highest ever recorded was 190-something, though I may be wrong.

Likewise, not all things were made by high IQ people. The building you're living in? Probably designed by an engineer who, while above average, is certainly nowhere near 180 or even 160. Most things in this world are probably made and designed by people who are, on the whole, probably only a little bit above average. Even new technologies are probably not made by people with 180 IQ, because even if they created as many things as Edison (was attributed to have) created, we'd still progress remarkably slowly if those people were the only ones who did anything.

awa
2010-08-13, 09:45 PM
This is what i do as a dm when a player has a high int or wisdom.

1 let them plan retroactively, simple stuff like if the party splits up but forgot to set a meeting place before hand.
2 discus things out of character for extended amounts of time in combat or other time constrained situations.
3 tell them information your character realizes this.

Mnemnosyne
2010-08-13, 10:09 PM
I don't think IQ works the way you think it does. Most real life geniuses who did great things would stretch to be 180. 200 is so rare I don't think anybody has actually achieved such an IQ; I think the highest ever recorded was 190-something, though I may be wrong.
Well his method would actually be pretty accurate an assessment, then, since 18 is max human stats unless you get into increases by leveling or age, and in 2nd Edition it was max human without powerful magic to increase it (or again age increases). It would mean that 18 intelligence = 180 IQ. Not that IQ is all that great a measurement system (it's about the best we can come up with but it has serious issues with some fields).

Overall it seems like most people agree that time and access to information is our only real advantage.

I had not considered the fact that a combat round is 6 seconds, while we have minutes (or hours or more in pbp) to ponder our actions, and that's a good point. OOC advice from fellow players also can help with that.

The major difficulty for a player, considering what's been said thus far, then comes up when the character has a considerable amount of time to think of something but the player really doesn't. Like something that is going to take a few days in-character, but is being done in the middle of a live session and 'time-compressed'. Even something as simple as considering a plan while making a two-day journey from one town to another can present something of an issue for the player to properly represent this character.

Perhaps the best solution, if the party and DM are agreeable, are to go over things like that with the DM so he can give the player of the high int/wis character a couple additional hints to represent additional connections the character makes as she analyzes the situation.

Milskidasith
2010-08-13, 11:57 PM
Well his method would actually be pretty accurate an assessment, then, since 18 is max human stats unless you get into increases by leveling or age, and in 2nd Edition it was max human without powerful magic to increase it (or again age increases). It would mean that 18 intelligence = 180 IQ. Not that IQ is all that great a measurement system (it's about the best we can come up with but it has serious issues with some fields).

Int being equal to IQ/10 is so horribly inaccurate it's laughable. Just consider that IQ is on a bell curve with a standard distribution of about 15 points (meaning there are exponentially less people with higher and higher IQ), but that 80 IQ points is only a +4 bonus in D&D terms, so little that it could be fairly easily overcame by luck. Granted, D&D is horrible at modelling real people in general, but that's another issue.

valadil
2010-08-14, 12:05 AM
I've yet to play a character with that high of an int score...

Nah I just get information from the GM. Make ridiculous amount of knowledge/int checks. Get information. Claim your character figured it out and go from there.

FirebirdFlying
2010-08-14, 12:15 AM
Re:Int vs. IQ -
If we assume, as isn't necessarily the case, that stats are generated by a 3d6, then an 18 comes up .5% of the time. If we look at a IQ distribution chart (one I found on Wikipedia, anyway), ie what they try to match IQs to, .5% is about 127 (likewise, a 3 is about 73, generally considered borderline mental function).

So - 18 isn't actually that good. Quite smart, yes, but not once-in-a-generation. D&D simply lacks the granularity to take starting stats to such depth.

EDIT: And re the topic at hand - well, I agree with everyone else, basically. Preparation can make up for intelligence. Wisdom's actually harder, I find. Hence why I tend to play low-wis characters.

Nefarion Xid
2010-08-14, 12:22 AM
Well, if you suppose that every person in a D&D world is created with 6 rolls of 3d6, then intelligence falls neatly on a bell curve as well, just not the same one. If you assume that 1 out of 216 people have 18 intelligence, that would make it comparable to an IQ of 145.

Of course, I don't think for a second that 18 is the nigh unattainable pinnacle of human capability either. An 18 Int strikes me more as a valedictorian rather than Dr. Hawking. Adventurers aren't better than everyone else because of raw natural ability, they just happen to be the sort to devote their lives to swordplay or arcana. That and adventurers just seem to have a whole array of psychological disorders. Any number of people in the village might be strong enough to be a Fighter, but it takes a special (crazy) kind of person to actually go explore the local dungeon... and murder the sentient inhabitants and take their stuff.

Edit: Whoops. Standard distribution fail on my part. 1/216 is much closer to an IQ of 138 or so.

Mando Knight
2010-08-14, 12:37 AM
Re:Int vs. IQ -
If we assume, as isn't necessarily the case, that stats are generated by a 3d6, then an 18 comes up .5% of the time. If we look at a IQ distribution chart (one I found on Wikipedia, anyway), ie what they try to match IQs to, .5% is about 127 (likewise, a 3 is about 73, generally considered borderline mental function).

So - 18 isn't actually that good. Quite smart, yes, but not once-in-a-generation. D&D simply lacks the granularity to take starting stats to such depth.

And thus do D&D players demand the ability to cast 8th level spells by virtue of statistical analysis. :smallamused:

Tyndmyr
2010-08-14, 07:36 AM
So I am curious as to how others handle the issue of playing NPC's and characters that are vastly more intelligent and possibly vastly wiser than they could possibly hope to be.

A. Get smarter.

B. Identify your normal flaws(Impatience, etc), and work around them.

C. Plan.

There's truly no way that an idiot can potray a genius without flaws...but he can probably act like a genius enough to look like one to those on the same mental playing field as him. Ditto for average people. So, unless you're significantly dumber than the people you game with, you can probably pull it off. In the rare event that this IS the case, only education will fix it.

As for planning, think of the spell contingency. Imagine different situations you might end up in. Consider the most creative means possible of escaping or defeating them. Limit yourself to using each plan once. Make lots of backup plans, and memorize them. This has the added side effect of generally leaving the DM(and thus, NPCs) unprepared for your plans, making your character look like even more of a mastermind.

After all, nobody ever seems to think of Batman as stupid.

Shademan
2010-08-14, 07:45 AM
If I play a high INT wizard I may make him rather low WIS or just really mumbly and aloof.
"what? no, that problem is FAR beneath my superior mind! I am busy contemplating the effect butterflies have on the astral plane...mumble mumble"

Galileo
2010-08-14, 07:48 AM
When I next DM, I'm considering allowing each character a number of brainwaves equal to their Int modifier. They can spend one to ask me to give them a nudge towards the solution or a good course of action.

Jeff the Green
2010-08-14, 11:45 AM
Re:Int vs. IQ -
If we assume, as isn't necessarily the case, that stats are generated by a 3d6, then an 18 comes up .5% of the time. If we look at a IQ distribution chart (one I found on Wikipedia, anyway), ie what they try to match IQs to, .5% is about 127 (likewise, a 3 is about 73, generally considered borderline mental function).

So - 18 isn't actually that good. Quite smart, yes, but not once-in-a-generation. D&D simply lacks the granularity to take starting stats to such depth.

I don't think this is quite right; since both 3d6 and IQ follow bell curves you need to look at standard deviation and mean, not just percentile. The mean of 3d6 is 10.5 (for simplicity, I'll use 10) and the standard deviation is 3. The mean of IQ is 100, and the standard deviation is 15. So every 1 point away from 10 INT is 5 points away from 100 IQ. Thus 18 INT = 100 + 8*5 = 140 IQ. That's not quite genius level, but it's pretty darn close. That also makes 3 INT = 100 - 7*5 = 65 IQ.

Generalized:
IQ = 100 + (INT - 10) * 5

Milskidasith
2010-08-14, 12:39 PM
I don't think this is quite right; since both 3d6 and IQ follow bell curves you need to look at standard deviation and mean, not just percentile. The mean of 3d6 is 10.5 (for simplicity, I'll use 10) and the standard deviation is 3. The mean of IQ is 100, and the standard deviation is 15. So every 1 point away from 10 INT is 5 points away from 100 IQ. Thus 18 INT = 100 + 8*5 = 140 IQ. That's not quite genius level, but it's pretty darn close. That also makes 3 INT = 100 - 7*5 = 65 IQ.

Generalized:
IQ = 100 + (INT - 10) * 5

Your formula can be simplified further as IQ = 50 + 5 * Int or Int = (IQ - 50)/5

Peregrine
2010-08-14, 12:41 PM
I tentatively offer the following suggestions: Think of smart characters from media -- especially ones who share your outlook and your other mental stats. So for high Int, average Wis, and dumped Cha, think nerdy (Big Bang Theory comes to mind). :smallsmile: Share and dissect plans with your group, out of character. Thus you roleplay your character literally as smart as a group of people. (This will help both you and the player of the character with a 6 in Int -- if that player comes up with a brilliant idea, your character can be the one to suggest it.)

This has been a sticking point in the debate over in the "Question of etics and being realistic (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=163923)" thread. I personally am quite strongly against handwaving details for very smart characters, saying "the character is smart enough to have thought of that". With Charisma skill checks, I prefer my players to state what they're going to say or do, and then their rolls dictate how well they deliver it. Likewise with Intelligence; you can let the dice speak to how well you think through a situation, but you can't just handwave away what it is you're going to think about.


The mean of 3d6 is 10.5 (for simplicity, I'll use 10) and the standard deviation is 3. The mean of IQ is 100, and the standard deviation is 15. So every 1 point away from 10 INT is 5 points away from 100 IQ. Thus 18 INT = 100 + 8*5 = 140 IQ. That's not quite genius level, but it's pretty darn close. That also makes 3 INT = 100 - 7*5 = 65 IQ.

That's pretty good. More rigorously (because I'm like that), the mean is 10.5 and the standard deviation is sqrt(8.75), or approximately 2.958. So an Int score I normalised to N(0, 1) is:
IN = (I − 10.5)/2.958

An IQ score Q similarly normalised is:
QN = (Q − 100)/15

And so:
Q = 100 + 15(I − 10.5)/2.958
= 100 + 5.071(I − 10.5)

For I = 18, Q = 138.0. For I = 3, Q = 61.97.

Yeah, your equations are more than good enough. :smallsmile:

Milskidasith
2010-08-14, 12:43 PM
I tentatively offer the following suggestions: Think of smart characters from media -- especially ones who share your outlook and your other mental stats. So for high Int, average Wis, and dumped Cha, think nerdy (Big Bang Theory comes to mind). :smallsmile: Share and dissect plans with your group, out of character. Thus you roleplay your character literally as smart as a group of people. (This will help both you and the player of the character with a 6 in Int -- if that player comes up with a brilliant idea, your character can be the one to suggest it.)

This has been a sticking point in the debate over in the "Question of etics and being realistic (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=163923)" thread. I personally am quite strongly against handwaving details for very smart characters, saying "the character is smart enough to have thought of that". With Charisma skill checks, I prefer my players to state what they're going to say or do, and then their rolls dictate how well they deliver it. Likewise with Intelligence; you can let the dice speak to how well you think through a situation, but you can't just handwave away what it is you're going to think about.



That's pretty good. More rigorously (because I'm like that), the mean is 10.5 and the standard deviation is sqrt(8.75), or approximately 2.958. So an Int score I normalised to N(0, 1) is:
IN = (I − 10.5)/2.958

An IQ score Q similarly normalised is:
QN = (Q − 100)/15

And so:
Q = 100 + 15(I − 10.5)/2.958
= 100 + 5.071(I − 10.5)

For I = 18, Q = 138.0. For I = 3, Q = 61.97.

Yeah, your equations are more than good enough. :smallsmile:

Peregrine, your method of "They have to say what they are going to do" penalizes people for attempting to play seems to be nearly identical to the problematic "You have to be charismatic IRL to get things to work, and the dice are ignored" thing. While obviously very silly or foolish ideas shouldn't work even on a highly intelligent character, requiring somebody to come up with a plan for a 30 int wizard is something that, to be frank, isn't possible for most any person.

Peregrine
2010-08-14, 12:55 PM
Peregrine, your method of "They have to say what they are going to do" penalizes people for attempting to play seems to be nearly identical to the problematic "You have to be charismatic IRL to get things to work, and the dice are ignored" thing. While obviously very silly or foolish ideas shouldn't work even on a highly intelligent character, requiring somebody to come up with a plan for a 30 int wizard is something that, to be frank, isn't possible for most any person.

Not at all! Perhaps I explained myself poorly (low IRL stats :smalltongue:). I'm trying to steer between the "roleplay or it didn't happen" and "don't talk, just roll" extremes. The dice are never ignored, so it's really not like that situation at all.

So if my players want to bluff their way past the guard, I want them to tell me (in general terms) what bluff they're going to try, and then their roll (combined with appropriate but very mild modifiers based on their declared intentions) dictates how convincing they are. I like to encourage roleplaying and so will gladly give more bonuses if they do convincingly roleplay the lie, but I would never give more penalties to punish not being as charismatic as the character.

And in the same way, if a player wants to be the chessmaster who plans ahead for many outcomes*, I want them to tell me (in general terms) what eventualities they're planning for. I don't want a three-page essay of the kind some people write to close off wish loopholes; but if they're planning castle defences, I want more than, "I think of all the ways someone could get in. *rolls*" Something like, "I consider the various ways that someone could get into this castle -- air, land and underground, magical and mundane," is enough.

* And may I point out that outside of the precisely controlled environment of the chessboard, foreseeing outcomes has a heavy dependence on Wisdom as well as Intelligence?

Yukitsu
2010-08-14, 09:31 PM
Ah, no. There's a limited number of solutions, but the possible plays are in the millions, so it's still strategy up to the point where you can look it up in an endgame table. Before then, the openings have names (since they're limited), but you've got several thousands of possibilities between where you are and where one will checkmate.

I believe only 283 of them are consistently used however. Just because a particular play can be used, doesn't mean many will.

Otodetu
2010-08-14, 10:29 PM
This is what i do as a dm when a player has a high int or wisdom.

1 let them plan retroactively, simple stuff like if the party splits up but forgot to set a meeting place before hand.
2 discus things out of character for extended amounts of time in combat or other time constrained situations.
3 tell them information your character realizes this.

Same here, quite logical really.

Another thing to do if you are to play a smart character is to study game rules in-depth.

I have many times calculated the exact thing my dm has planned to do simply by looking at the resources available and possible solutions.

Then again it depends on your dm, so basically to play a smart character, try to think like the dm, and understand how he reacts to the actions of the players. Sort of like meta gaming.

Mnemnosyne
2010-08-14, 10:42 PM
And in the same way, if a player wants to be the chessmaster who plans ahead for many outcomes*, I want them to tell me (in general terms) what eventualities they're planning for. I don't want a three-page essay of the kind some people write to close off wish loopholes; but if they're planning castle defences, I want more than, "I think of all the ways someone could get in. *rolls*" Something like, "I consider the various ways that someone could get into this castle -- air, land and underground, magical and mundane," is enough.

* And may I point out that outside of the precisely controlled environment of the chessboard, foreseeing outcomes has a heavy dependence on Wisdom as well as Intelligence?
I suppose this may be the best way to work such a thing as a player in general, depending on the situation. State in general terms what the character is attempting to do or figure out, and then give appropriate guidance from there based on the character. It works better in some situations than others, and I imagine DM and player(s) will need to sit down once in a while and talk over some aspect of it, but it's probably about the only way to go.

As for the wisdom issue, probably true, but the point still holds that a D&D character can have both of those stats higher than any real human could ever achieve, if they expend the resources necessary to achieve such superhuman statistics.

devinkowalczyk
2010-08-14, 10:46 PM
An easy way to do it as a player is to have it reflected in your knowledge checks.
Another is to really study. Don't move your character impulsively.

Volos
2010-08-14, 10:53 PM
If there is a character smarter than me (which is seriously doubtful), then I randomly ask the DM if I can roll an intelligence check to come up with a solution or the start to a solution of the current problem at hand. Otherwise, act as if everyone around you needs extra explaining due to your amazing brilliance or that they need small words so that you don't confuse them, even though small words for you are more then likely to be something along the lines of surreptitious and Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.

Knaight
2010-08-14, 11:15 PM
Its worth noting -though several people already have, to limited extents- that the players have huge advantages over the characters due to detachment. Characters tend to operate in high stress situations, in which ones full capabilities are probably not going to show; players have no real stress in the decision making process. Furthermore there is significant time dilation, players can spend minutes discussing what takes place in seconds, or take minutes covering days and glossing over details. Added to that is a far superior knowledge base, and a huge advantage when comparing plans against that of adversity. The appearance of superintelligence is very much relative, and as the character is being compared to a background world populated by NPCs under the control of one person. It is the GMs portrayal that needs outsmarting, and the GM lacks advantages that organizations and such would have, not the least of which being large groups coming up with ideas. Ultimately, one should be able to compensate for a great deal in regards to intelligence -moreso than wisdom or charisma even- and even the smartest of characters should present little difficulty.

mint
2010-08-15, 07:51 AM
Intelligence will not determine a persons actions.
Their personality will.
That is not to say that it is unimportant, but it is pretty unimportant.

Example:
In real life, my mother is exceptionally gifted but to me, most of the time, she is just mom.
Her intelligence does not define her as a person.

I think there is an expectation that if you become just bit smarter, you will be able to make new connections that are simply impossible to make otherwise. And it is not really so.

It will affect how efficiently you do a number of things but after some fairly arbitrary threshold, it is not really relevant. It will NOT open up a new world of perception for you.

If you want to portray an intelligent character, select attributes that you associate with intelligence and game on those. Like, a slacker who picks up new skills and information with unfair ease.
Or a person who seems to have more energy and time than others, always learning and trying new things. Like, being driven, active, sparkly.


The idea about a limited amount of retroactive planing the OP had was a nice touch.


Other than that, find a way to hand-wave ridiculous intelligence. Like say, its a function that plateaus.
D&D has issues with high attribute scores and trying to simulate them becomes silly.

Gnaeus
2010-08-15, 10:03 AM
Its worth noting -though several people already have, to limited extents- that the players have huge advantages over the characters due to detachment. Characters tend to operate in high stress situations, in which ones full capabilities are probably not going to show; players have no real stress in the decision making process. Furthermore there is significant time dilation, players can spend minutes discussing what takes place in seconds, or take minutes covering days and glossing over details.

Sometimes that is true, but sometimes it is the opposite.

If I am planning an imaginary assault on an enemy base, an imaginary bank job, or how to build my imaginary fortress, my party is likely to stop debating possibilities after 30 minutes or so, because it isn't THAT important to us as players, we want to get in there and roll some dice. Our characters, on the other hand, might take days or weeks to plan an undertaking which is to them potentially of life or death importance. They might use multiple divinations with slightly different wordings to make sure that they fully understand the situation, have full party discussions of what spells all the casters are carrying, etc.

More than that, in many cases of time dilation, the characters are benefited by recent memories of events that took place for them only a few days ago, but depending on out of game factors like holidays or combat filled games (where a game session might only cover an hour or so of in character time), we are struggling to recall events that might have happened 3 months ago. In some gaming groups the players might have been drinking or otherwise impared at the time.

Peregrine
2010-08-15, 10:10 AM
In some gaming groups the players might have been drinking or otherwise impared at the time.

In many gaming groups, the same goes for characters. :smallwink:

Gnaeus
2010-08-15, 10:14 AM
In many gaming groups, the same goes for characters. :smallwink:

Sure, but in my experience, it is much easier to play a character who is heavily inebriated when the player is sober, than the other way around. It works best when the levels of chemical alteration are similar, but that doesn't always happen.

Knaight
2010-08-15, 10:17 AM
If I am planning an imaginary assault on an enemy base, an imaginary bank job, or how to build my imaginary fortress, my party is likely to stop debating possibilities after 30 minutes or so, because it isn't THAT important to us as players, we want to get in there and roll some dice. Our characters, on the other hand, might take days or weeks to plan an undertaking which is to them potentially of life or death importance. They might use multiple divinations with slightly different wordings to make sure that they fully understand the situation, have full party discussions of what spells all the casters are carrying, etc.

Sure, but consider the enemy base or imaginary bank. The base has more people than you involved in performing and improving the defenses over a longer period of time. Lets say you have a 6 person party, and it is a mere 30 person base, and while the characters take three weeks to plan the base only had six weeks of planning put in. This would be somewhat better than the best case realistic scenario, and the time dilation is ten times worse for the GM even according to it. Time dilation almost always favors the players, frequently in more than one way.

Gnaeus
2010-08-15, 10:27 AM
Sure, but consider the enemy base or imaginary bank. The base has more people than you involved in performing and improving the defenses over a longer period of time. Lets say you have a 6 person party, and it is a mere 30 person base, and while the characters take three weeks to plan the base only had six weeks of planning put in. This would be somewhat better than the best case realistic scenario, and the time dilation is ten times worse for the GM even according to it. Time dilation almost always favors the players, frequently in more than one way.

Sometimes, sometimes not. The base's defenses are often only planned by the boss or maybe the boss and 1-2 chief allies. The hired guards aren't likely to have a lot to input, in the unlikely event that they are even asked. On the other hand, the adventuring party is likely to have multiple individuals with uncommonly high mental stats (most casters, most skillmonkeys, some types of melee).

The DM isn't struggling to recall details of clues given 3 months ago, because he wrote the plot. He also has easy access to metaknowledge that the players lack, and as was correctly mentioned, he can just fudge outcomes to simulate higher intelligence.

Knaight
2010-08-15, 11:16 AM
Sometimes, sometimes not. The base's defenses are often only planned by the boss or maybe the boss and 1-2 chief allies. The hired guards aren't likely to have a lot to input, in the unlikely event that they are even asked. On the other hand, the adventuring party is likely to have multiple individuals with uncommonly high mental stats (most casters, most skillmonkeys, some types of melee).

Sure, but the design of the base has hundreds of years of architecture behind it, from people who are theoretically actual architects who actually lived in a world full of magic and monsters and such, rather than people who imagine it occasionally and probably have minimal architectural knowledge that is actually applicable. The boss and allies may have gone through military academies, may have access to information uncovered throughout the history of the world, and other such things, and even then they would have been operating for years most of the time.

Gnaeus
2010-08-15, 03:17 PM
Sure, but the design of the base has hundreds of years of architecture behind it, from people who are theoretically actual architects who actually lived in a world full of magic and monsters and such, rather than people who imagine it occasionally and probably have minimal architectural knowledge that is actually applicable.

The boss and allies may have gone through military academies, may have access to information uncovered throughout the history of the world, and other such things, and even then they would have been operating for years most of the time.

They MAY have a lot of things. They may just as easily have inherited the base from previous inhabitants, who may have been insane cultists, or commoners with only basic knowledge of how to build a fort or bank, or many other things. The PCs may have graduated from military academies, while the enemy crime boss was breaking people's kneecaps in a rough neighborhood. The impact of time dilation can easily work in either direction, being vastly dependent on the specific details.

awa
2010-08-15, 11:04 PM
I would also mention many dms will not allow players to spend a long time discussing things out of combat for example saying an hour has passed after the players spends 20 minutes talking particularly if the characters have a time limit.

Or as a separate but related idea for example say you say okay we head to the caves of evil darkness but forget torches now the characters may have spent a week walking to the cave and would almost certainly have remembered that they need torches but many dms in my personal experience will say no you already left even if you the player remember mere minutes after saying you left for the cave particularly if travel was something along the lines of okay now your there.

Adamaro
2010-08-16, 07:51 AM
What if humans are completely unable to exceed INT 18 and just go insane?

http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2007/02/intelligence_and_insanity.php

It came to my mind more then once.